--initlabel is not required. It only makes sense in conjunction with --all.

> Since I am using the option --useexisting do I still need to use the part
> commands?

As far as I know: no. However, reusing existing block devices is
extremely prone to breaking and very difficult to troubleshoot, in my
experience. You may need to experiment. Typically, I'll start with the
anaconda-generated kickstart file from a manual installation and test
each individual change, line by line, option by option, when I'm
troubleshooting anaconda.
_______________________________________________
users mailing list -- [hidden email]To unsubscribe send an email to [hidden email]

Re: Installing F26; Question about ks.cfg when raid1 is used

> On Wed, 9 Aug 2017 12:00:00 -0700
> Rick Stevens <[hidden email]> wrote:
>
>> On 08/09/2017 11:52 AM, D&R wrote:
>>> When I boot into the install there is an error in the destination section.
>>>
>>> I looked at the debug info in the storage.log and there was an
>>> error about sdb1 did not exist. But...
>>>
>>> When I reboot to F24 then ...
>>>
>>> cat /proc/mdstat
>>>
>>> md126 : active raid1 sda2[2] sdb2[1]
>>> 961261568 blocks super 1.2 [2/2] [UU]
>>> bitmap: 2/8 pages [8KB], 65536KB chunk
>>>
>>> md127 : active raid1 sdb1[1] sda1[2]
>>> 15368064 blocks super 1.0 [2/2] [UU]
>>> bitmap: 1/1 pages [4KB], 65536KB chunk
>>>
>>> The section of ks.cfg for hard drive setup is as follows:
>>>
>>> ignoredisk --only-use=sda,sdb
>>> bootloader --location=mbr --boot-drive=sda
>>>
>>> # Partition clearing information
>>> clearpart --none --initlabel
>>>
>>> # Disk partitioning information
>>>
>>> part raid.6 --fstype=mdmember --noformat --onpart=sda1
>>> part raid.27 --fstype=mdmember --noformat --onpart=sdb1
>>> part raid.14 --fstype=mdmember --noformat --onpart=sda2
>>> part raid.32 --fstype=mdmember --noformat --onpart=sdb2
>>>
>>> raid / --device=root --fstype=ext4 --level=raid1 --useexisting
>>> raid /home --device=home --fstype=ext4 --level=raid1 --noformat
>>> --useexisting
>>>
>>> I currently have a raid1 setup with 2 drives sda and sdb
>>>
>>> Since I am using the option --useexisting do I still need to use the part
>>> commands?
>>>
>>> The last time I did an upgrade was to F24 I have not found anything that
>>> says the syntax has changed.
>>>
>>> Any Ideas?
>>
>> Uhm, when you're booting the install, is it possible that the CD/DVD
>> you're booting from becomes /dev/sda? If so, then your first hard drive
>> is /dev/sdb and the second is /dev/sdc and the
>>
>> ignoredisk --only-use=sda,sdb
>>
>> would block using the second hard drive, since it's /dev/sdc at this
>> time. This is just a wild guess.
>
> I am booting from an iso file from another computer. As I recall that is what
> I did when I installed F24 over F22.

How are you booting an ISO file from another computer? Is this a network
kickstart install, where the iso image is located on an NFS or CIFS
server?

Whatever it is, can you boot it again without invoking kickstart? If you
can, open up a command line window and do "fdisk -l", which should list
the disks the system sees. Verify the devices are the ones you think
they are. Remember that when you're booting F24 from the hard disk, you
are absolutely making /dev/sda the first hard drive. When booting from
the network, a CD/DVD or a bootp server, that may NOT be the case and
your drive letters may be different, in which the limits in your
"ignoredisk" line would prevent finding the second drive.

> In the setup above it shows raid.<number> (ie. raid.6). Do you know what the
> number represents? Can it be changed from one install to the next?

The "raid" bit of the label simply means they're to be used in a
software RAID. I have no idea why they're numbered in that manner rather
than sequentially.

Right below those "part" definitions, you see "raid" definitions where
those labels are normally used. In your case,

raid / --device=root --fstype=ext4 --level=raid1 --useexisting

tells the system to use the first two devices in the "part" section
(/dev/sda1 and /dev/sdb1) as a RAID1, format it as ext4 and mount it at
"/". Since no partitions are specified, it uses the first two in the
"part" section. In reality, that line with all the bits specified would
be:

You should be able to rename the labels in your ks.cfg if you wish, but
again if your RAID definition doesn't use sequential partitions, make
sure you specify them appropriately. The labels have no significance
outside of Anaconda/kickstart as far as I know.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
- Rick Stevens, Systems Engineer, AllDigital [hidden email] -
- AIM/Skype: therps2 ICQ: 226437340 Yahoo: origrps2 -
- -
- Charter Member of the International Sarcasm Society -
- "Yeah, like we need YOUR support!" -
----------------------------------------------------------------------
_______________________________________________
users mailing list -- [hidden email]To unsubscribe send an email to [hidden email]

Re: Installing F26; Question about ks.cfg when raid1 is used

On 08/09/2017 02:27 PM, Rick Stevens wrote:
> Right below those "part" definitions, you see "raid" definitions where
> those labels are normally used. In your case,
>
> raid / --device=root --fstype=ext4 --level=raid1 --useexisting
>
> tells the system to use the first two devices in the "part" section
> (/dev/sda1 and /dev/sdb1) as a RAID1, format it as ext4 and mount it at
> "/". Since no partitions are specified, it uses the first two in the
> "part" section.

Is that documented somewhere? I've never seen that behavior described
in the kickstart documentation, and I was curious enough to test it. If
I provide a "raid" specification with no partitions, installation of
CentOS fails with an error that reads "Partitions required for raid".

I didn't test Fedora, but the documentation for the "raid" command in
both appears to be the same.
_______________________________________________
users mailing list -- [hidden email]To unsubscribe send an email to [hidden email]

Re: Installing F26; Question about ks.cfg when raid1 is used

On 08/09/2017 04:02 PM, Gordon Messmer wrote:

> On 08/09/2017 02:27 PM, Rick Stevens wrote:
>> Right below those "part" definitions, you see "raid" definitions where
>> those labels are normally used. In your case,
>>
>> raid / --device=root --fstype=ext4 --level=raid1 --useexisting
>>
>> tells the system to use the first two devices in the "part" section
>> (/dev/sda1 and /dev/sdb1) as a RAID1, format it as ext4 and mount it at
>> "/". Since no partitions are specified, it uses the first two in the
>> "part" section.
>
> Is that documented somewhere? I've never seen that behavior described
> in the kickstart documentation, and I was curious enough to test it. If
> I provide a "raid" specification with no partitions, installation of
> CentOS fails with an error that reads "Partitions required for raid".

You have to have at least two "part raid.somenumber" lines to create a
RAID1, and a "raid" line to define the type of RAID, filesystem type
and mountpoint.

> I didn't test Fedora, but the documentation for the "raid" command in
> both appears to be the same.

Re: Installing F26; Question about ks.cfg when raid1 is used

On 08/09/2017 06:14 PM, Rick Stevens wrote:
>
> You have to have at least two "part raid.somenumber" lines to create a
> RAID1, and a "raid" line to define the type of RAID, filesystem type
> and mountpoint.

I did. I used a kickstart that was as close to D&R's snippet as possible.

Yeah, that's the platform I tested. It definitely does not work as you
described. At least not in my tests. As far as I can tell, you *must*
specify the partitions unless you are reusing an existing RAID device.
_______________________________________________
users mailing list -- [hidden email]To unsubscribe send an email to [hidden email]

It appears to have located all the drives and raid instances as well as the
iso file and the ks.cfg file

Is there any other info that would be useful to get?

David

>

> Whatever it is, can you boot it again without invoking kickstart? If you
> can, open up a command line window and do "fdisk -l", which should list
> the disks the system sees. Verify the devices are the ones you think
> they are. Remember that when you're booting F24 from the hard disk, you
> are absolutely making /dev/sda the first hard drive. When booting from
> the network, a CD/DVD or a bootp server, that may NOT be the case and
> your drive letters may be different, in which the limits in your
> "ignoredisk" line would prevent finding the second drive.
>
> > In the setup above it shows raid.<number> (ie. raid.6). Do you know what
> > the number represents? Can it be changed from one install to the next?
>
> The "raid" bit of the label simply means they're to be used in a
> software RAID. I have no idea why they're numbered in that manner rather
> than sequentially.
>
> Right below those "part" definitions, you see "raid" definitions where
> those labels are normally used. In your case,
>
> raid / --device=root --fstype=ext4 --level=raid1 --useexisting
>
> tells the system to use the first two devices in the "part" section
> (/dev/sda1 and /dev/sdb1) as a RAID1, format it as ext4 and mount it at
> "/". Since no partitions are specified, it uses the first two in the
> "part" section. In reality, that line with all the bits specified would
> be:
>
> raid / --device=root --fstype=ext4 --level=raid1 --useexisting raid.6
> raid.27
>
> If the partitions to use weren't sequential (e.g. you wanted to use the
> first and third partitions), you'd need to specify them explicitly at
> the end of the line:
>
> raid / --device=root --fstype=ext4 --level=raid1 --useexisting raid.6
> raid.14
>
> You should be able to rename the labels in your ks.cfg if you wish, but
> again if your RAID definition doesn't use sequential partitions, make
> sure you specify them appropriately. The labels have no significance
> outside of Anaconda/kickstart as far as I know.
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> - Rick Stevens, Systems Engineer, AllDigital [hidden email] -
> - AIM/Skype: therps2 ICQ: 226437340 Yahoo: origrps2 -
> - -
> - Charter Member of the International Sarcasm Society -
> - "Yeah, like we need YOUR support!" -
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> _______________________________________________
> users mailing list -- [hidden email]> To unsubscribe send an email to [hidden email]